Phenacobius mirabilis
(Girard, 1856)
Common Name:
Suckermouth Minnow
Synonyms and Other Names:
Identification:
Phenacobius mirabilis have a bicolored body: olive brown coloring along the dorsal side with silver white on the ventral side separated by a thin dark stripe. They have a black spot at the base of the caudal fin. Typically, P. mirabilis have 42-51 scales on the lateral line and 15-17 scales around the caudal peduncle (Page and Burr, 1991).
Size:
5-13 cm
Native Range:
Mississippi River basin from Ohio and West Virginia to Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico, and from southeastern Minnesota to northern Alabama and southern Oklahoma; western Lake Erie drainage, Ohio; isolated populations in Gulf Coast drainages (Sabine Lake, Louisiana and Texas, Galveston Bay, Texas, Colorado River, Texas, and upper Pecos River, New Mexico) (Page and Burr 1991).
Great Lakes Nonindigenous Occurrences:
This species has been recorded from (and possibly introduced into) Lake Erie tributaries of Michigan (Bailey and Smith 1992); and Buckeye Lake in the Muskingum River drainage (Ohio River basin) and Lake Erie of Ohio (Trautman 1981; Mills et al. 1993). An early record of the species from the North Brule River in the Lake Superior drainage proved to be a misidentification of juvenile Rhinichthys atratulus meleagris (Hubbs 1945).
Table 1. Great Lakes region nonindigenous occurrences, the earliest and latest observations in each state/province, and the tally and names of HUCs with observations†. Names and dates are hyperlinked to their relevant specimen records. The list of references for all nonindigenous occurrences of Phenacobius mirabilis are found here.
Full list of USGS occurrences
Table last updated 4/27/2024
† Populations may not be currently present.
Ecology:
Phenacobius mirabilis prefer temperatures from 5-25 °C, and pH levels between 6.5-7.8 (Page and Burr, 2011). They typically inhabit gravel riffles in clear to turbid creeks and rivers (Page and Burr, 1991). Predators of Phenacobius mirabilis include yellow perch (Perca flavescens) and brown trout (Salmo trutta), but they are probably fed on by other piscivores (Quist et al., 2005). P. mirabilis will eat plankton and small invertebrates; chironomid larvae, tricopteran larvae, and chironomid pupae are prominent in their diet (Whitaker, 1977).
Great Lakes Means of Introduction:
Unknown; possibly the result of bait bucket releases.
Great Lakes Status:
Cryptogenic. It is not certain if the records of this species from Michigan and parts of Ohio represent introductions or were simply the result of natural dispersal. The Suckermouth minnow did not occur in Michigan, or Ohio and West Virginia for that matter, before the early 1900s; natural eastward dispersal of the species has been rapid, and has occurred as a result of increased water turbidity and siltation following conversion of the prairies to farming. These changes have apparently benefited the Suckermouth minnow as well as a few other native fishes. In the list of Michigan fishes given by Bailey and Smith (1992), P. mirabilis was denoted as one of several fishes “established through the direct or indirect intervention of humans.” However, these authors provided no additional details. We interpreted the words of Bailey and Smith (1992) to mean that the species was introduced to Michigan. Nevertheless, the authors may have simply meant that P. mirabilus spread naturally into Michigan as a result of human farming practices and other human-induced changes to the aquatic environment. In their summary table on fishes of the Great Lakes basin, Bailey and Smith (1981) indicated that P. mirabilis had colonized tributaries of Lake Erie recently via canal or by natural dispersal following introduction. Underhill (1986) and Hubbs et al. (2004) made no mention of the possible introduction of this species into the northern United States. Hocutt et al. (1986), apparently based on Cavender and Ciola (1981), stated that it was one of several species that invaded the Muskingum River drainage since 1930; however, in their summary table on fishes of the Central Appalachians and Central Atlantic Coastal Plain, Hocutt et al. (1986) listed P. mirabilis as native to the Muskingum drainage. Most populations in the Great Lakes are currently considered nonindigenous.
Great Lakes Impacts:
There is little or no evidence to support that Phenacobius mirabilis has significant environmental impacts in the Great Lakes.
Phenacobius mirabilis is a common host for the parasite Lernaea cyprinacea, but many other Great Lakes native fishes also serve as hosts. Phenacobius mirabilis is considered to be intolerant of competition (Pflieger 1997). Given the species’ reproductive requirement for silt-free riffles (Smith 1979, Cross and Collins 1995, Pflieger 1997), negative impacts to water quality seem unlikely.
There is little or no evidence to support that Phenacobius mirabilis has significant socio-economic impacts in the Great Lakes.
There is little or no evidence to support that Phenacobius mirabilis has significant beneficial effects in the Great Lakes.
Management:
Regulations (pertaining to the Great Lakes)
There are no known regulations for this species. Note: Check federal, state/provincial, and local regulations for the most up-to-date information.
Control
Biological
There are no known biological control methods for this species.
Physical
Dispersal of this species was facilitated by increasing turbidity of streams as a result of human activity; improvement of farming and land use practices to minimize runoff may improve habitat for native fishes and prevent further dispersal of P. mirabilis.
Chemical
Of the four chemical piscicides registered for use in the United States, antimycin A and rotenone are considered general piscicides (GLMRIS 2012). There are no available studies of their effects on Suckermouth Minnow at the time of this writing.
Increasing CO2 concentrations, either by bubbling pressurized gas directly into water or by the addition of sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) has been used to sedate fish with minimal residual toxicity, and is a potential method of harvesting fish for removal, though maintaining adequate CO2 concentrations may be difficult in large/natural water bodies (Clearwater et al. 2008). CO2 is approved only for use as an anesthetic for cold, cool, and warm water fishes the US, not for use as euthanasia (Clearwater et al. 2008). Exposure to NaHCO3 concentration of 142-642 mg/L for 5 min. is sufficient to anaesthetize most fish (Clearwater et al 2008).
It should be noted that chemical treatment will often lead to non-target kills, and so all options for management of a species should be adequately studied before a decision is made to use piscicides or other chemicals. Potential effects on non-target plants and organisms, including macroinvertebrates and other fish, should always be deliberately evaluated and analyzed. The effects of combinations of management chemicals and other toxicants, whether intentional or unintentional, should be understood prior to chemical treatment. Other non-selective alterations of water quality, such as reducing dissolved oxygen levels or altering pH, could also have a deleterious impact on native fish, invertebrates, and other fauna or flora, and their potential harmful effects should therefore be evaluated thoroughly.
Note: Check state/provincial and local regulations for the most up-to-date information regarding permits for control methods. Follow all label instructions.
Remarks:
It is not certain if the records of this species from Michigan and parts of Ohio represent introductions or were simply the result of natural dispersal. Phenacobius mirabilis is native to a large part of Ohio; however, Trautman (1981) stated that the population in Buckeye Lake, Ohio, "possibly had been introduced inadvertently from the bait buckets of fishermen." The Suckermouth Minnow did not occur in Michigan, or Ohio and West Virginia for that matter, before the early 1900s; natural eastward dispersal of the species has been rapid, and has occurred as a result of increased water turbidity and siltation following conversion of the prairies to farming. These changes have apparently benefited the Suckermouth Minnow as well as a few other native fishes. In the list of Michigan fishes given Bailey and Smith (1992), P. mirabilis was denoted as one of several fishes "established through the direct or indirect intervention of humans." However, these authors provided no additional details. We interpreted the words of Bailey and Smith (1992) to mean that the species was introduced to Michigan. Nevertheless, the authors may have simply meant that P. mirabilus spread naturally into Michigan as a result of human farming practises and other human-induced changes to the aquatic environment. In their summary table on fishes of the Great Lakes basin, Bailey and Smith (1981) indicated that P. mirabilis had colonized tributaries of Lake Erie recently via canal or by natural dispersal following introduction. Underhill (1986) and Hubbs et al. (2004) made no mention of the possible introduction of this species into the northern United States. Hocutt et al. (1986), apparently based on Cavender and Ciola (1981), stated that it was one of several species that invaded the Muskingum River drainage since 1930. However, in their summary table on fishes of the Central Appalachians and Central Atlantic Coastal Plain, Hocutt et al. (1986) listed P. mirabilis as native to the Muskingum drainage.
References
(click for full reference list)
Author:
Nico, L., J. Larson, T.H. Makled, and A. Fusaro
Contributing Agencies:
Revision Date:
1/17/2024
Peer Review Date:
7/8/2014
Citation for this information:
Nico, L., J. Larson, T.H. Makled, and A. Fusaro, 2024, Phenacobius mirabilis (Girard, 1856): U.S. Geological Survey, Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database, Gainesville, FL, and NOAA Great Lakes Aquatic Nonindigenous Species Information System, Ann Arbor, MI, https://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/greatlakes/FactSheet.aspx?Species_ID=617&Potential=N&Type=0, Revision Date: 1/17/2024, Peer Review Date: 7/8/2014, Access Date: 4/28/2024
This information is preliminary or provisional and is subject to revision. It is being provided to meet the need for timely best science. The information has not received final approval by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and is provided on the condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S. Government shall be held liable for any damages resulting from the authorized or unauthorized use of the information.